10 ms·

It didn’t matter who gave them the news, that’s a helluva impact. A doctor could be in the room and give the same message in a cold manner as many do each day a

It didn’t matter who gave them the news, that’s a helluva impact. A doctor could be in the room and give the same message in a cold manner as many do each day and the family would have felt the same. The blame on reading the screen is more technophobic and sensationalized.

Mizza 8y ago
> technophobic Welcome to 2019, everybody! Won't somebody _please_ think of the robots!
- baggsie 8y ago
  You're assuming that they identify as robots!
- whymauri 8y ago
  This is a weird comment. When people are claustrophobic the implication is not that we need to sympathize with closed-spaces. You're injecting a meaning that was almost surely unintended to make a shaky ironic point.
  - presscast 8y ago
    You're feeding a troll.
    - Mizza 8y ago
      I'm not a troll, I'm seriously objecting to the idea that we should reject the concerns of a dying person as "technophobic", as if that's some kind of silver bullet in an argument in favor of technology. I've never heard anybody seriously say "technophobic" before and I found it rather shocking and naive.
      - presscast 8y ago
        Ah, I do apologize then. I misinterpreted your post.
eli 8y ago
That telepresence robot looks ridiculous. I would absolutely not want to have a serious conversation through it.
potta_coffee 8y ago
Or the doctor could be in the room and act like somewhat of a human being and break the difficult news in a professional and socially accepted way.
- sodosopa 8y ago
  But that’s also a problem with a lot of physicians, from my experience they provide vague answers and hint around. For one of my recent family members, I pulled her social worker aside and said this is a binary yes or no, Should we call hospice? And even then after much handwringing, the physician blurted it out to my family member despite having health care PoA In a perfect scenario as it is on television a scholarly physician sits on the bedside, pats the patient’s knee and looks them in the eye and says, “we’ve done all we could”. I worked in health care for decades, while not in a care role, I went through and managed some of the training programs to improve bedside manner/customer service. I had to document each physician as they spoke with my family member. Because of two of the three experiences they were eager to turn over the bed instead of providing compassionate care
danso 8y ago
The point of having a doctor in the room versus a video screen is that the presence of the human is generally less "cold". Besides the audio quality problems the family describes, the manner of delivery has connotations of mass-produced automated service, which also feels cold.
- plants 8y ago
  "We're sorry, you have termin -kshhhh- cer. Our models estimate you have -kshhhh- to live. Have a nice day!"
mc32 8y ago
I don’t think so. While the results don’t change, a lot of human sociability is about doing the nothings in life. Like going through the motions of offering to pay yet knowing it’s the other person who’s going to pay (maybe they invited you, have more money, etc.,) still it’s consideted bad manners not to at least feign an offer. Same here. The doctor and hospital should strive to be as human and empathetic as possible given the bad news. Adding an electronic intermediary created distance and adds coldness and the artifice of bureaucracy to the event.
- sodosopa 8y ago
  Couple each experience with social workers, religious staff and the patient’s care team. While a physician isn’t physically in the room, a caring influence over the discussion could help despite being a cold doc or a cold robot.
plants 8y ago
Is "technophobic" really a bad word now? If so, I'm an outright technophobe. If you're going to break hard news to anyone (whether it be a breakup, telling someone their loved one has died, or telling someone they are dying) you might as well give them the benefit of being there in person. You can hug a person, you can't hug a screen.
- potta_coffee 8y ago
  It's just an ad hominem attack. I don't agree with you, so you're a "phobe". Technology isn't really the issue here.
- pas 8y ago
  People are in general have a very bad handle on fundamental parts of life, like death. (And personal finances, metacognition and so on.) And sure, doctors can play the emergency psychologist while delivering the news, but people don't just go to the hospital and get a random death sentence. They knew there was a very significant chance that the news will be bad. Yes, when the uncertainty evaporates together with the favorable outcome, that's fucking harsh, and there's a process for dealing with that (the good old Kübler-Ross stages come to mind). People should be better prepared for these eventualities. (And I'm not saying it's easy, and people must be perfect stoics, but these theatrics we assign to conveying a few bits of information coupled with the human touch is just a psychology theater.)
  - ripsawridge 8y ago
    "these theatrics we assign to conveying a few bits of information..." Really? You really are of the opinion that news about death is just "a few bits of information?" And you are capable of describing the ways humans attempt to be empathic with each other as "these theatrics?" I'm not sure I want to live in this world. :(
    - pas 8y ago
      Yes. You already have an expected lifespan. Getting sick, makes you reevaluate that, and getting a concrete diagnosis with an expert opinion should not be a big change. Of course, we can do the be positive, be optimistic, you can fight it, you can do it mantra, and then watch as their heart breaks when they get the diagnosis. Empathy shouldn't mean helping people to delay facing the hard problems and truths. This is the same world that largely considers suicide a crime, and denies a dignified and conscious end of life to a lot of suffering people. I watched as a family member went through the stages of physiological and mental decline, dementia, muscle atrophy, and eventually even breathing was a full time job, and it became too much. And it was a relatively painless end. (And there were others with different, faster ends. Recently one with cancer.) And taking it for what it is seemed the healthier mindset and approach. Accepting the inevitable led to those last days and months better spent. And preparing for it is just as important. We already drag doctors into enough futile quarrels of our own. At least that's my opinion.
ergothus 8y ago
Agreed - While I have HUGE sympathy for doctors that have to deliver this kind of news, I have numerous complaints about the care and attention I get from my doctors today when they AREN'T remote - I don't see remote as really being relevant here: Attitude and behavior count for a lot more.
vividtulips 8y ago
"Daughter Catherine Quintana says the family is also upset because her father had trouble hearing the doctor through the robot's speaker forcing Wilharm to relay the terrible news." The blame is on the full device, not just the screen.
rthomas6 8y ago
Do you think it would be possible to deliver the news well via robot? I don't believe so. The news could be delivered well or poorly in person, but it could only be delivered poorly via robot. But it really doesn't matter what we think about the robot. It matters what that family thought, and they had a problem with it. To say it's okay is to ignore their voice, because in their specific case, they weren't okay with it. It seems cold and lacking in compassion to not allow even such a simple request for the sake of comfort for someone in such a difficult place.
- sodosopa 8y ago
  I believe it could be delivered good or bad by both. It depends on so many factors.
Darkstack 8y ago
It's true that it didn't matter who gave them the news, but a lot of what we call "communication" is non verbal, so I think the screen did not help. You can forgive someone for something if he's in front of you, i doubt you would forgive him the same way by SMS/Phone call.
sp0rk 8y ago
> A doctor could be in the room and give the same message in a cold manner as many do each day and the family would have felt the same. So you think we should systematically bring this poor experience to everyone via robots because some human doctors perform the same task poorly?
- sodosopa 8y ago
  I think we should make it agnostic to where it doesn’t matter how the person gets the message. Couple either experience with support groups.

Mizza 8y ago

> technophobic Welcome to 2019, everybody! Won't somebody _please_ think of the robots!

baggsie 8y ago
You're assuming that they identify as robots!
whymauri 8y ago
This is a weird comment. When people are claustrophobic the implication is not that we need to sympathize with closed-spaces. You're injecting a meaning that was almost surely unintended to make a shaky ironic point.
- presscast 8y ago
  You're feeding a troll.
  - Mizza 8y ago
    I'm not a troll, I'm seriously objecting to the idea that we should reject the concerns of a dying person as "technophobic", as if that's some kind of silver bullet in an argument in favor of technology. I've never heard anybody seriously say "technophobic" before and I found it rather shocking and naive.
    - presscast 8y ago
      Ah, I do apologize then. I misinterpreted your post.

eli 8y ago

That telepresence robot looks ridiculous. I would absolutely not want to have a serious conversation through it.

potta_coffee 8y ago

Or the doctor could be in the room and act like somewhat of a human being and break the difficult news in a professional and socially accepted way.

sodosopa 8y ago
But that’s also a problem with a lot of physicians, from my experience they provide vague answers and hint around. For one of my recent family members, I pulled her social worker aside and said this is a binary yes or no, Should we call hospice? And even then after much handwringing, the physician blurted it out to my family member despite having health care PoA In a perfect scenario as it is on television a scholarly physician sits on the bedside, pats the patient’s knee and looks them in the eye and says, “we’ve done all we could”. I worked in health care for decades, while not in a care role, I went through and managed some of the training programs to improve bedside manner/customer service. I had to document each physician as they spoke with my family member. Because of two of the three experiences they were eager to turn over the bed instead of providing compassionate care

danso 8y ago

The point of having a doctor in the room versus a video screen is that the presence of the human is generally less "cold". Besides the audio quality problems the family describes, the manner of delivery has connotations of mass-produced automated service, which also feels cold.

plants 8y ago
"We're sorry, you have termin -kshhhh- cer. Our models estimate you have -kshhhh- to live. Have a nice day!"

mc32 8y ago

I don’t think so. While the results don’t change, a lot of human sociability is about doing the nothings in life. Like going through the motions of offering to pay yet knowing it’s the other person who’s going to pay (maybe they invited you, have more money, etc.,) still it’s consideted bad manners not to at least feign an offer. Same here. The doctor and hospital should strive to be as human and empathetic as possible given the bad news. Adding an electronic intermediary created distance and adds coldness and the artifice of bureaucracy to the event.

sodosopa 8y ago
Couple each experience with social workers, religious staff and the patient’s care team. While a physician isn’t physically in the room, a caring influence over the discussion could help despite being a cold doc or a cold robot.

plants 8y ago

Is "technophobic" really a bad word now? If so, I'm an outright technophobe. If you're going to break hard news to anyone (whether it be a breakup, telling someone their loved one has died, or telling someone they are dying) you might as well give them the benefit of being there in person. You can hug a person, you can't hug a screen.

potta_coffee 8y ago
It's just an ad hominem attack. I don't agree with you, so you're a "phobe". Technology isn't really the issue here.
pas 8y ago
People are in general have a very bad handle on fundamental parts of life, like death. (And personal finances, metacognition and so on.) And sure, doctors can play the emergency psychologist while delivering the news, but people don't just go to the hospital and get a random death sentence. They knew there was a very significant chance that the news will be bad. Yes, when the uncertainty evaporates together with the favorable outcome, that's fucking harsh, and there's a process for dealing with that (the good old Kübler-Ross stages come to mind). People should be better prepared for these eventualities. (And I'm not saying it's easy, and people must be perfect stoics, but these theatrics we assign to conveying a few bits of information coupled with the human touch is just a psychology theater.)
- ripsawridge 8y ago
  "these theatrics we assign to conveying a few bits of information..." Really? You really are of the opinion that news about death is just "a few bits of information?" And you are capable of describing the ways humans attempt to be empathic with each other as "these theatrics?" I'm not sure I want to live in this world. :(
  - pas 8y ago
    Yes. You already have an expected lifespan. Getting sick, makes you reevaluate that, and getting a concrete diagnosis with an expert opinion should not be a big change. Of course, we can do the be positive, be optimistic, you can fight it, you can do it mantra, and then watch as their heart breaks when they get the diagnosis. Empathy shouldn't mean helping people to delay facing the hard problems and truths. This is the same world that largely considers suicide a crime, and denies a dignified and conscious end of life to a lot of suffering people. I watched as a family member went through the stages of physiological and mental decline, dementia, muscle atrophy, and eventually even breathing was a full time job, and it became too much. And it was a relatively painless end. (And there were others with different, faster ends. Recently one with cancer.) And taking it for what it is seemed the healthier mindset and approach. Accepting the inevitable led to those last days and months better spent. And preparing for it is just as important. We already drag doctors into enough futile quarrels of our own. At least that's my opinion.

ergothus 8y ago

Agreed - While I have HUGE sympathy for doctors that have to deliver this kind of news, I have numerous complaints about the care and attention I get from my doctors today when they AREN'T remote - I don't see remote as really being relevant here: Attitude and behavior count for a lot more.

vividtulips 8y ago

"Daughter Catherine Quintana says the family is also upset because her father had trouble hearing the doctor through the robot's speaker forcing Wilharm to relay the terrible news." The blame is on the full device, not just the screen.

rthomas6 8y ago

Do you think it would be possible to deliver the news well via robot? I don't believe so. The news could be delivered well or poorly in person, but it could only be delivered poorly via robot. But it really doesn't matter what we think about the robot. It matters what that family thought, and they had a problem with it. To say it's okay is to ignore their voice, because in their specific case, they weren't okay with it. It seems cold and lacking in compassion to not allow even such a simple request for the sake of comfort for someone in such a difficult place.

sodosopa 8y ago
I believe it could be delivered good or bad by both. It depends on so many factors.

Darkstack 8y ago

It's true that it didn't matter who gave them the news, but a lot of what we call "communication" is non verbal, so I think the screen did not help. You can forgive someone for something if he's in front of you, i doubt you would forgive him the same way by SMS/Phone call.

sp0rk 8y ago

> A doctor could be in the room and give the same message in a cold manner as many do each day and the family would have felt the same. So you think we should systematically bring this poor experience to everyone via robots because some human doctors perform the same task poorly?

sodosopa 8y ago
I think we should make it agnostic to where it doesn’t matter how the person gets the message. Couple either experience with support groups.